What is the Dimension of the Field Extension R[dx]?

  • Thread starter Thread starter vshiro
  • Start date Start date
vshiro
Consider R, or rather the equivalence class of fields isomorphic to R, endowed with an order type of the same kind. Let us consider a new object, dx, a quantity such that dx > 0, but for all a > 0 in R, dx < a. (We are considering dx, something outside of R, but without the context of a larger universe set.)
Now let add dx to R, and field-ify it. That is, we are considering the infinite field extension R[dx]. Furthermore we inherit the order of R, but extend it to include dx. The way I think about the order type is that, suppose we can sort of magnify R until we see a, b, and a, b have no more elts of R between them (there is no c with a<c<b)... we can't actually do this, but entertain this idea for a moment. Adding dx to R is like fitting another whole copy of R between a and b: we have between them a < a + k*dx < b for all k in R. But then we magnify this new copy of R until we get to a, b and add another copy of R (dx^2) and so on, and do this for all nonexistent pairs a, b satisfying there is no c st a<c<b...
My question is, what is the "dimension" of R[dx]? It is not 2.. The above thought experiment suggests that it is |Z| (aleph-1), but I don't believe that is true. It may well be |R|, but I suspect the answer is much more sinister...

Note that the standard definition of dimension in field extension doesn't apply.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
What definition of dimension are you wanting to use?
 
Now let add dx to R, and field-ify it. That is, we are considering the infinite field extension R[dx]

Do you mean R(dx)? R[dx] is merely a ring in this case, because dx cannot be written as a root of a polynomial in R[x].


My question is, what is the "dimension" of R[dx]?

For R[dx], it's easy. R[dx] is isomorphic to R[x], which is countably infinite dimensional over R; its basis is
{1, x, x^2, x^3, x^4, ... }


R(dx) is isomorphic (ignoring the order) to R(x), the field of rational functions. Finding a vector space basis of R(x) over R is a lot trickier, but we can solve our problem without it:

Consider S = {p(x)/q(x) | p and q are in R[x] and q(x) is not 0}

Clearly S is a spanning set of R(x) (it includes every element of R(x)!), and |S| = |R|, so the dimension of the extension can be no more than |R|.

However, consider T = {1/(x - a) | a in R}

linearly independant, so the dimension of the extension can be no less than |T| = |R|.


So, R(dx) is a field extension of R with dimension |R|


Note that the standard definition of dimension in field extension doesn't apply.

Why?


Hurkyl
 
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
Thread 'Imaginary Pythagorus'
I posted this in the Lame Math thread, but it's got me thinking. Is there any validity to this? Or is it really just a mathematical trick? Naively, I see that i2 + plus 12 does equal zero2. But does this have a meaning? I know one can treat the imaginary number line as just another axis like the reals, but does that mean this does represent a triangle in the complex plane with a hypotenuse of length zero? Ibix offered a rendering of the diagram using what I assume is matrix* notation...
Back
Top